Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)Chandigarh Administration And Anr vs Surinder Kumar And Ors on 27 November, 2003
with respect to the reserved categories of SC and ST the Chandigarh Administration has felt bound by the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Chandigarh Administration Vs. Surinder Kumar (supra), but in the case of OBCs the Administration took a policy decision that the benefit of reservation to this category would be extended on the pattern of the Central Government, wherein the OBC would have to be as is included both in the Central List as well as in the Union Territory, Chandigarh List.
Sh. Mewa Singh Water Man Cum Cleaner ... vs Union Of India Though The Secretary on 6 May, 2010
6. The learned counsel for the applicant has cited SCT 1991(1) 424 wherein Honble Apex Court in the case of H.C. Singhal Vs. Union of India and Ors. had held that
Termination Order/Competent/Appointing authority-Promotion order passed by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority may be valid but termination order passed by such authority and its confirmation by the appointing authority as well cannot be treated passed by a competent authority.
Mohan Lal Darshan Kumar vs S.P. Bookal, Income-Tax Officer And ... on 24 November, 1994
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has also cited decision of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in CWP No.315 of 1993 in the case of Sudarshan Lal Vs. State of G.P. wherein it was held by the Honble apex court:
Sh. Jagdish Chandra Sahu vs B.H.E.L. on 18 July, 2008
7. The learned counsel further referred to the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the matter of Jagdish Chander Vs. H.S.E.B. reported in 1993(3) SCT Page 439 holding as under:
1